19127 réponses à ce sujet

[vetirokay]

 

 Consumers making assumptions based on what they are told are also their responsibility and NOT Bioware's.

That's a ridiculous comment.

[Han Master]

That's a ridiculous comment.

Does look like someone is trolling.

[Brogan]

This. There is a reason every MOBA, every RTS, and actual tactical RPGs like XCOM use the screen edge to pan with the mouse. Its better. Objectively. If it had an option for people to move it around with WASD, then hey, cheers. 

 

 Yep. There really is no justification for trying to reinvent the wheel with this.

[Payload]

Does look like someone is trolling.

He's trolling just don't feed him. As someone who has experience in internet marketing knows that a lot of the marketing techniques evolve around hyperbole as in the case of Bioware in the Youtube Iink I posted a page or two back about Inquisition being build for PC gamers. Every experienced DAO player knows that by watching that video, it is utter bullshit. I have never seen a game such as inquisition that really stressed the importance of using a controller to play.

 

Hopefully if Bioware fixes all this it will make what Gothfather has said seem irrelevant.

[Arkanon]

5. When did Bioware promise you could play DA:I one handed? It was disclosed early that DA:I was being developed with a FPS engine, what FPS games can you play with one hand? Origin has a generous return policy if you ASSUMED you could play with one hand but cant you had the option to return the game for a FULL refund. Thats a very fair refund policy. This is such a BS issue. Keyboard and Mouse IMPLY two hands as they are two seperate imput devices designed to be used in tandom. It should be the EXPECTATION that you require two hands to use both these imput devices at the same time which is the default assumption developers make AND NOT AN UNREASONABLE ASSUMPTION. The fact that in past games it was possible to play with one hand a DA title in no way obligates Bioware to make DA:I one hand friendly. Bioware NOT manking DA:I one hand friendly has ZERO relivance to this idea that Bioware decieved or lied or EA is engaging in business malpractise. Bioware is not responsible for peoples ASSUMPTIONS. They were promised a Keyboard and Mouse inferface and they got one. They never promised said interface would be one handed friendly.

 

 

I think it's safe to say that most people know that Bioware didn't "promise" anyone that DA:I could be played by "one handed people", but Bioware games in the past, whether intentional or not, did have design elements and controls, that helped disabled people play there games. DA:I is a big step away from past Bioware games in my opinion, with clunky controls and design elements which make it harder for disabled people to play there games.

 

I'm not disabled, but the first thing that came to my mind when I started playing DA:I was how uncomfortable and clunky the PC controls were. I found it that bad I couldn't get immersed into the game because I felt like I was fighting against the controls every step of the way. I am now eagerly waiting for a patch so I can enjoy the game like I did previous Bioware games. The 2nd thing I thought of is, if I found it this hard and uncomfortable to play, how would people with disabilities find it?

 

It's easy for people like you, I assume with no disabilities, to say "this is such a BS issue" but the fact is there are a lot of disabled folks out there that do enjoy playing games. I really dislike how Bioware have moved away from past design philosophy in this regard. They are leading the way in incorporating same sex relationships into their games stories, which I really like, but I'm sure they can lead the way in also incorporating better design/controls for disabled people into their rpgs too. And although it maybe "the default assumption that developers" make there games with no thought for the disabled gaming community, I disagree with you when your personal belief is that it is "a reasonable one".

 

So to conclude, Is it unreasonable for disabled people to also enjoy playing Bioware RPG's due to poor design elements and controls?

[Gothfather]

hmmm...if you played DAO, you should know that moving the mouse ALONE over the edges will move the tac-cam around....is the new way to move the tac-cam better than just moving the mouse around???

 

you know, NO ONE should ever make fun of people with disabilities, but in this very specific case, I do have to make fun of yours......you have THREE hands!!!!!

When did I make fun of any disability? Simply challenging the idea that a pc game that isn't disability friendly =/= poor game design is not making fun. I can't think one a single FPS or MMO that you can play one handed so just because DA:I is not one handed friendly doesn't make it a poorly designed game. People being disappointed in something =/= poor game design.

 

Again we see the use of past expereince to falsely try and lend authority to an arguement. It assumes because I disagree I must not have the same experience with the past game which is false. Second is assume past expereince with a game lends justification for expectations in present games. It doesn't. Bioware never claimed DA:I would be DA:O2. They said the controls were SIMILAR but not exactly like DA:O. which they are. So any assumptions you brought to the table are your own responsibility not Biowares.

 

I don't expect my games to be static I expect them to evolve, I expected the tac cam to be different to the DA:O, first  because they wanted a system that could be used on 5 platforms not just one and they were VERY up front about this. Second because games only improve if they innovate. You innovate by taking the tried a true and trying something different. I have played many a game where you need to press a mouse button to change your camera angle pressing a different button to add panning to a second combat mode does not strike me as a failure or worse, but granted I can't say it is better either.  It is DIFFERENT but different =/= worse.

[Gothfather]

I think it's safe to say that most people know that Bioware didn't "promise" anyone that DA:I could be played by "one handed people", but Bioware games in the past, whether intentional or not, did have design elements and controls, that helped disabled people play there games. DA:I is a big step away from past Bioware games in my opinion, with clunky controls and design elements which make it harder for disabled people to play there games.

 

I'm not disabled, but the first thing that came to my mind when I started playing DA:I was how uncomfortable and clunky the PC controls were. I found it that bad I couldn't get immersed into the game because I felt like I was fighting against the controls every step of the way. I am now eagerly waiting for a patch so I can enjoy the game like I did previous Bioware games. The 2nd thing I thought of is, if I found it this hard and uncomfortable to play, how would people with disabilities find it?

 

It's easy for people like you, I assume with no disabilities, to say "this is such a BS issue" but the fact is there are a lot of disabled folks out there that do enjoy playing games. I really dislike how Bioware have moved away from past design philosophy in this regard. They are leading the way in incorporating same sex relationships into their games stories, which I really like, but I'm sure they can lead the way in also incorporating better design/controls for disabled people into their rpgs too. And although it maybe "the default assumption that developers" make there games with no thought for the disabled gaming community, I disagree with you when your personal belief is that it is "a reasonable one".

 

So to conclude, Is it unreasonable for disabled people to also enjoy playing Bioware RPG's?

 

Your post was very condescending.

It is a BS issue to use it as an arguement for poor PC design or proof DA:I is a bad console port.

 

Accessability shouldn't be used a some kind of trump card to pull on a company to try and gain brownie points on an UNRELATED issue.

 

If you want to start a thread about how you think DA:I should be more accessable then fine. But it is a total BS argument to say you could play X game with one hand so that proves Y game is poorly designed because you can't play it with one hand, it is unfairly conflating two seperate issues.

[Fast Jimmy]

It is a BS issue to use it as an arguement for poor PC design or proof DA:I is a bad console port.

Accessability shouldn't be used a some kind of trump card to pull on a company to try and gain brownie points on an UNRELATED issue.

If you want to start a thread about how you think DA:I should be more accessable then fine. But it is a total BS argument to say you could play X game with one hand so that proves Y game is poorly designed because you can't play it with one hand, it is unfairly conflating two seperate issues.

Having an interface so simple and intuitive to use that people with disabilities can utilize it with ease is the exact same issue as what is being discussed here.

[vetirokay]

 

 

Again we see the use of past expereince to falsely try and lend authority to an arguement. 

 

I don't expect my games to be static I expect them to evolve, I expected the tac cam to be different to the DA:O, first  because they wanted a system that could be used on 5 platforms not just one and they were VERY up front about this. Second because games only improve if they innovate. You innovate by taking the tried a true and trying something different. 

 

Well, first, past experience doesn't lend false authority when the game company itself cites it as a marketing point.

 

Second, what you describe is called experimentation, which very rarely leads to innovation and is very often and rightfully so left on the cutting room floor until such experimentation does indeed lead to innovation worthy of a commercial product.

[Gothfather]

 Yep. There really is no justification for trying to reinvent the wheel with this.

No justification REALLY?

 

I seem to remember a time when a screen was a perfectly useful device without the ability to use touch as an imput device. Yet someone reivented the "wheel" and now we have tablets and smart phones all with reivented "wheels." Seems perfect justification for companies to ALWAYS try an innovate to me. Sometimes your inovations work sometimes they don't.

 

I still remember people QQing how unnecessary touch screens where when the iphone first came out. Then people got use to the new innovation and its now a standard. But I guess in your version of the perfect world there are no innovations anymore.

[Gothfather]

Having an interface so simple and intuitive to use that people with disabilities can utilize it with ease is the exact same issue as what is being discussed here.

Conflating again.

 

It makes the assumption that all disabilities are "equal" that not having a "system" that allows for someone with a disability to use if flawed or poorly designed because it is too complex. Take a bicycle you can't ride one with various disabilities but you can with others. The unmodified bicycle has been cited as a near perfect simple machine. Yet it is NOT disability friendly, Try to ride a bike with no arms or no legs, try to ride it blind, or with one leg or one arm. I am not making a joke i am simply pointing out there are HUGE assumptions to the statement.

 

Simplicity =/= disability friendly

[Arkanon]

It is a BS issue to use it as an arguement for poor PC design or proof DA:I is a bad console port.

 

Accessability shouldn't be used a some kind of trump card to pull on a company to try and gain brownie points on an UNRELATED issue.

 

If you want to start a thread about how you think DA:I should be more accessable then fine. But it is a total BS argument to say you could play X game with one hand so that proves Y game is poorly designed because you can't play it with one hand, it is unfairly conflating two seperate issues.

 

So you add fuel to the fire in regards to the whole PC vs Console argument by participating in it with your own biases and arguments at the same time using disability/accessability as an argument in favour of your own biases here and when someone disagrees with you, they should make a new thread to discuss those opinions you presented in this very thread?

 

Maybe you should start a new thread on PC vs Console yes?

[Fast Jimmy]

I still remember people QQing how unnecessary touch screens where when the iphone first came out.

You use the phrase "QQing" more than anyone I've ever seen. Which is only worth commenting because you are using it incorrectly.

[Jymm]

Mmmm.  All the flame-age.  Tasty!

 

Anyway, I'm not personally disabled, though both my parents are and many of their friends and associates.  I know a number of folks who are quadriplegic or have cerebral palsy who still enjoy video games.  Finding games they can play well is tough, so I'm definitely a fan of flexible PC control schemes that let them customize the experience.  Things like auto-pause, mouse button remapping, and a really functional tactical camera make it much easier for someone with mobility / dexterity issues to keep a handle on the action so they can still enjoy the game and the story.  A number of my disabled gaming friends have definitely mourned the decline of turn-based games in favor of action-oriented FPS and real-time strategy.  This particular DAI design for PC controls does seem like a step backward for gaming accessibility.

 

And with all that being said, I _also_ agree that its kind of a separate issue aside from the whole "PC controls suck" issue.  The PC controls do suck, and they suck for everyone, whether disabled or not.  That's my 2 cents anyway.

[Gothfather]

/snip

 

Again we see the use of past expereince to falsely try and lend authority to an arguement. It assumes because I disagree I must not have the same experience with the past game which is false. Second is assume past expereince with a game lends justification for expectations in present games. It doesn't. Bioware never claimed DA:I would be DA:O2. They said the controls were SIMILAR but not exactly like DA:O. which they are. So any assumptions you brought to the table are your own responsibility not Biowares.

 

I don't expect my games to be static I expect them to evolve, I expected the tac cam to be different to the DA:O, first  because they wanted a system that could be used on 5 platforms not just one and they were VERY up front about this. Second because games only improve if they innovate. You innovate by taking the tried a true and trying something different. I have played many a game where you need to press a mouse button to change your camera angle pressing a different button to add panning to a second combat mode does not strike me as a failure or worse, but granted I can't say it is better either.  It is DIFFERENT but different =/= worse.

 

 

Well, first, past experience doesn't lend false authority when the game company itself cites it as a marketing point.

 

Second, what you describe is called experimentation, which very rarely leads to innovation and is very often and rightfully so left on the cutting room floor until such experimentation does indeed lead to innovation worthy of a commercial product.

 

It does lend false authority to your argument for the reasons I stated but you conviently refused to quote in your response. 

 

Bioware said DA:I was SIMILAR TO NOT EXACTLY LIKE DA:O. They deliberatly stated this was NOT DA:O2. So any claims to playing DA:O mean nothing beyond are these games similar? yes they are.

[vetirokay]

No justification REALLY?

 

I seem to remember a time when a screen was a perfectly useful device without the ability to use touch as an imput device. Yet someone reivented the "wheel" and now we have tablets and smart phones all with reivented "wheels." Seems perfect justification for companies to ALWAYS try an innovate to me. Sometimes your inovations work sometimes they don't.

 

I still remember people QQing how unnecessary touch screens where when the iphone first came out. Then people got use to the new innovation and its now a standard. But I guess in your version of the perfect world there are no innovations anymore.

Your heart is in the right place, but your thinking is skewed. 

 

A leap from mouse pointer to touchscreen tech is a far cry from what is being addressed here.

 

That aside, as an engineer who worked with touchscreen tech, you would be surprised how much junk had to be navigated through to get to a stable, usable product. Let alone what is now used on tiny devices. But I guess you would have been proud to pay for those failed experiments.

 

You're basically saying that consumers should pay full price for experiments that should be left in the oven, so to speak.

 

Let alone comparing keybinds and zoom levels to a leap in tech that completely changes how a person interacts with a computer..

 

Again, experimentation and innovation are very much different things.

 

Someone help me get these troll hooks out of my mouth...Damn rum.

[Ashen Nedra]

To Gothfather

Yes REALLY.

 

This is the typical arguement of some PC gamers I was talking about. I played DA:O and DA2 (Two not so much as I felt it was a bad game but this is what a 16 - 18 month development cycle will give you). SO don't try to give your argument some kind of extra authority it doesn't have by claiming past experience with previous games. First it assumes that past experience is not shared with people you disagree with and assumes past experience somehow equates with justification of expectations. It doesn't. Time and time again you were told this game was built on a FPS engine and time and time again you were told this game has similar but not identical controls to DA:O. I did not follow this game extensively until september/oct and even with my casual contact with the development of DA:I I KNEW these things. So if SOME PC gamers did not that is on them not EA or Bioware because they did tell you.

 

I am WISE enough to know games change, controls change and the only way games improve is if they CHANGE things that are not broken. Sometimes the changes are good sometimes they are not but invovation is vital to the industries survival. This is how we inovate, we have touch screens now because someone took a NOT broken system and changed it on our phones. So YES THEY SHOULD CHANGE SYSTEMS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN.

 

I am sorry but Bioware NEVER promised you could play the game one handed. And its a stupid an argument as claiming there is no discriptive video so I can't play the game blind. yes its that stupid. Because your experiences from previous games mean nothing yes nothing. Bioware was VERY up front that this game was being made with a new engine and that engine was designed for a first person shooter. Name a shooter you can play one handed? They were also clear that there controls were similar to but not indetical to DA:O for the PC inerface.

 

They promised you could use mouse and keyboard controls and that the Ui would support it. And it does. The tac cam is 100% fully functional, its not perfect and the default bindings are sucky but that isn't anything new on computer games. i rebind almost all my controls in an MMO or the Witcher both PC only games so this idea that the default bindings are proof of a bad consol port is a strawman arguement at best at worst its delibertaly trying to misinform to strengthen your position. I think the only think you can't do in DA:I that you could in DA:O is click on loot and you auto run to pick it up. (Just an FYI you can click to move in tac cam)

 

Now if you expected to be able to play this game one handed and you can't thats tough luck, but you have or had the option to return the game. Origin has a liberal return policy. And anyone could have tried the game seen it can't be played with one hand and returned the game in said time window. So there can be ZERO claims to unfair business practises on that front.

 

I find it utterly baffling that somehow its EA/Bioware's fault for gamers having the expectation that a game designed on a SHOOTER engine could be played one handed and then to use this as a fraking justification to BLAME this bizzare expectation on the fact that you can't play the game one handed on the game was designed for consoles as well.

A shooter engine... rebinding your mouse, adapting to two half-assed different control schemes, playing on Nightmare...Do you realize that most people on this thread DON't play games as an extreme sport? Some only play RPGs, some even only play DA because they are passionate about the game universe. 

 

So as an extreme gamer you are able to beat the game on nightmare with such a perverse control scheme and enjoy yourself (I notice you mention using a long-distance party, try using a melee rogue on nightmare and answer me then, I did it and it's f..ing unplayable and painful till) and as a lawyer I can tell you that there is such a concept as "common general knowledge" used to construe any misrepresentation in advertising.

 

And your level of knowledge or expertise at playing a videogame isn't relevant.

 

The two sentences "Made by PC gamers for PC gamers" and "the tactical camera is just what you would except from Origins, you will be super pleased" with it, might.

[Gothfather]

So you add fuel to the fire in regards to the whole PC vs Console argument by participating in it with your own biases and arguments at the same time using disability/accessability as an argument in favour of your own biases here and when someone disagrees with you, they should make a new thread to discuss those opinions you presented in this very thread?

 

Maybe you should start a new thread on PC vs Console yes?

what?

 

I did not use disability/accessability in my arguements show me where i did so? I pointed out that this is a BS issue with regards to PC controls. It assumes that unaccessability =/= poor design. Its not.

 

Accessability is a COMPELTELY seperate issue because you can have accessability with both well designed and poorly designed games. Likewise you can have an inaccessable game that is well designed or poorly designed. Conflating the two seperate issues is a diservice and it muddlies the waters. How its being used on this thread it to add false "weight" to an argument. So I am calling people out on it.

[vetirokay]

It does lend false authority to your argument for the reasons I stated but you conviently refused to quote in your response. 

 

Bioware said DA:I was SIMILAR TO NOT EXACTLY LIKE DA:O. They deliberatly stated this was NOT DA:O2. So any claims to playing DA:O mean nothing beyond are these games similar? yes they are.

Now that I think about it, you are right. They couldn't have come up with a better innovation to the control scheme. 

[Chaos17]

Come on everyvbody, let's take a break and smile at this advetisement which gently troll us who wait for new haircuts.

 

source

[Razael]

Guys please stop quoting and replying to gothfather. We should be directing our opinions to bioware/ea, not to this kid.

[Aguycalledhaney]

Um... not to butt in... but when are we getting a patch, exactly? I'm kinda waiting.

[MadWild]

New issues today:

 

Random game lock on connecting to dragon age servers and random game lock when pressed the continue game button on the main menu.

 

Both times the performance tab on task manager usage went up, and dragon age process was not responding.

 

Exit and reload, works fine.

 

On some days it works fine, other days it does not, I can play other games fine (I have ~24 odd games installed currently).

 

I don't know if it's me, but is it connecting to Dragon Age servers taking more time ?

[Gothfather]

To Gothfather

A shooter engine... rebinding your mouse, adapting to two half-assed different control schemes, playing on Nightmare...Do you realize that most people on this thread DON't play games as an extreme sport? Some only play RPGs, some even only play DA because they are passionate about the game universe. 

 

So as an extreme gamer you are able to beat the game on nightmare with such a perverse control scheme and enjoy yourself (I notice you mention using a long-distance party, try using a melee rogue on nightmare and answer me then, I did it and it's f..ing unplayable and painful till) and as a lawyer I can tell you that there is such a concept as "common general knowledge" used to construe any misrepresentation in advertising.

 

And your level of knowledge or expertise at playing a videogame isn't relevant.

 

The two sentences "Made by PC gamers for PC gamers" and "the tactical camera is just what you would except from Origins, you will be super pleased" with it, might.

 

First

Here is some helpful tips if you still want to play a melee rogue..

 

I have a melee rogue and on nightmare but I found that I was dying all the time until i did three things.

 

1) learned the "tells" of enemies for their AOE attacks. terror demons uggg bears double ugg. Once i learned these I knew when to interupt or run away.

 

2) Do not play a static rogue you MUST move in and out of combat range. This required me to invest 7 ability points into non double daggers. 3 in Subterfuge to get evade and 4 in sabatage to get hook and tackle with the upgrade so it had no cooldown and cost no stamina. This gave me the mobility to move around. its a slow process.

 

3) get on hit gain X guard masterworked. Obsidian grants this as a tier two metal which is a middle level solution.

 

I wasn't able to figure this all on my own but its possible to play a melee rogue you just can't play it as stand still and spam the attack keys.

 

Second

 

My experience with the tac cam is NOT because i claim to be a hard core player. I have also not beaten the game on nightmare yet. What playing on nightmare did was FORCE me to learn the tac cam. because I was not good enough in "action" mode to beat boss mobs on nightmare. My lack of skill forced me to into the tac cam mode. i found that the key binds screwed me up when i went from full mouse control to mouse and keyboard in the tactical mode. So I rebound them this meant when I pressed a wasd key I wasn't conflicting with the mouse in terms of camera orientation. It made a big  difference in having a comfortable experience with the tac cam.

 

Once I became more experience I was able to switch from mouse only tac cam control to mouse and keyboard tac cam control seamlessly. I do not claim this is a hard skill to master or that it shows any great skill on my part. I am just pointing out how much of a difference two keybind changes helped me.

 

I changed two key binds thats it, this is NOT a mouse button rebinds but keyboard rebinds, a perfectly normal thing to do for a pc game.

 

in tac cam mode these are my keybinds there is nothing perverse or extreme gaming knowledge here its two MINOR keybind changes.

 

move left (Tactical camera) = A

Move right (Tactical camera) = D

 

Those two minor canges made the tac cam so much easier to manage. I default for both is Turn right/left (Tactical camera). What is so preverse about those changes?

 

I mainly use the middle mouse button to move the camera around the map in combat but I know that some mice can be glitchy with the middle mouse button being also the scroll wheel so you have the option of using LMB+RMB at the same time as per the codex. The one thing I think the codex leaves out is that the shift button also works to pan the camera around.

 

i'd love to know what super hard core knowledge I am using to create some perverse control system? I am using an almost completely default tac cam setting with 2 keybind changes. I am sure as a LAWYER you can show me what point my knowledge or expertise making two keybind changes equates to irrelevent level of expertise/knowledge?